Audio Myths Thread

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 12448 times.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #60 on: 26 May 2019, 06:37 pm »
That's the theory. If you sample at at least twice the highest frequency, you theoretically can recreate the original waveform.  That's why they use 44.1 kHz, sampling twice 22 kHz.

Is the waveform actually exactly the same as the original?  Therein lies the controversy.



From the EE article:  (This should answer the sampling questions).

Another reason for vinyl's sonic superiority is that no matter how high a sampling rate is, it can never contain all of the data present in an analog groove, Nyquist's theorem to the contrary.
This statement is, of course, mistaken on several points, but remains a popular belief among many non-technical audiophiles and listeners.  Obviously it shows a misunderstanding of Nyquist's theorem, but also a failure to recognize - or acknowledge - that the "data present in an analog groove" is limited in any way.
Once again this appears to be a case of music listeners and audiophiles grasping for technical reasons to justify their subjective preferences. Why they persist in doing this I'm not sure - perhaps it has something to do with a need to be "right" - but in the vinyl vs. CD debate this approach is destined to prove unrewarding.

Russell Dawkins

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #61 on: 26 May 2019, 06:56 pm »
Once again this appears to be a case of music listeners and audiophiles grasping for technical reasons to justify their subjective preferences. Why they persist in doing this I'm not sure - perhaps it has something to do with a need to be "right"

In my experience the "need to be right" is as prevalent amongst engineers as it is in audiophiles. Pretty much everyone needs to be right...

Lets be frank; that's what this entire thread is about.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #62 on: 26 May 2019, 09:56 pm »
In my experience the "need to be right" is as prevalent amongst engineers as it is in audiophiles. Pretty much everyone needs to be right...

Lets be frank; that's what this entire thread is about.



Just to be clear:  The need to be right quote was from the article. 


The intent of the thread was less about "being right" and more about "being informed" about subjects that the engineering runs counter to legacy convictions (getting outside the swim lane, if you will).


1) I always had a belief that linear power supplies were superior to switched mode power supplies.  I thought I was right about that.  Well, turns out I was wrong about that "right" assumption.  The demonstrations from listening to the Devialet and Benchmark gear forced a change in that thinking.  :o


2) I had a belief that any Class D amp was not as good as a linear amp (even though I kept trying to find one I liked).  The light weight and portability aspects are appealing.  Took awhile, but again, the Devialet proved that there was a method to implement Class D that works as good or better than a straight linear amp.  Granted, Devialet is not a straight Class D amp, but does provide current (a variation of feed forward) driven by a Class A voltage amp.  I would have never thought that this approach could compete with a Pass amp, as an example.  Well, again, that turned out to be not right.  :o


3) The digital vs. vinyl arguments will never go away.  For years, I believed vinyl was superior to digital.  At first, that was largely true.  However, time marches on, and digital has progressed a lot.  The facts support the digital medium as having a whole host of technical advantages over analog based media.


In summary, the thread is intended to be more open to other audio applications, and to provide some background that is based on engineering that actually can be verified.  :thumb: 

wushuliu

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #63 on: 26 May 2019, 09:59 pm »
In my experience the "need to be right" is as prevalent amongst engineers as it is in audiophiles. Pretty much everyone needs to be right...

Lets be frank; that's what this entire thread is about.

I suspect this has a gender component as well. Which makes these debates even more tiresome.

Photon46

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #64 on: 26 May 2019, 10:55 pm »
As far as vinyl vs. digital, let's acknowledge that for some of us, there are collecting/ historical aspects to the love of vinyl. When I go into a large record store and start browsing, I feel a connection with the history of recorded music. The smell, feel, typography, and photography of a vinyl lp can enhance a deeper connection with the recording than pulling up a playlist on a  screen. The act of engaging with vinyl recordings and all the rituals it entails can reinforce the likelihood that you'll listen more closely to the music. Those aspects of vinyl appreciation are totally subjective of course, but art appreciation IS a subjective experience. I think that's a large part of the reason younger people are buying vinyl even if they don't appreciate good sound reproduction.

Rather like some prefer a drive in a wooden chassis three wheel Morgan to a quasi-autonomous high tech Tesla I suppose.  :lol:




Elizabeth

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2736
  • So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish
Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #65 on: 27 May 2019, 12:42 am »
wow

Russell Dawkins

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #66 on: 27 May 2019, 02:27 am »
As far as vinyl vs. digital, let's acknowledge that for some of us, there are collecting/ historical aspects to the love of vinyl. When I go into a large record store and start browsing, I feel a connection with the history of recorded music. The smell, feel, typography, and photography of a vinyl lp can enhance a deeper connection with the recording than pulling up a playlist on a  screen. The act of engaging with vinyl recordings and all the rituals it entails can reinforce the likelihood that you'll listen more closely to the music. Those aspects of vinyl appreciation are totally subjective of course, but art appreciation IS a subjective experience. I think that's a large part of the reason younger people are buying vinyl even if they don't appreciate good sound reproduction.

Rather like some prefer a drive in a wooden chassis three wheel Morgan to a quasi-autonomous high tech Tesla I suppose.  :lol:

Well said.

Steve

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #67 on: 27 May 2019, 03:33 am »
If all you care about is specs and measurements, you will be missing out on a lot of great audio quality IME.

Steve N.

I will back you in the above position Steve N. In addition for public consumption, using a particular analog design but exchanging different quality parts, and using the specs we generally used in manuals, the specs will remain the same, but the sonics will be quite different.

Cheers
steve
« Last Edit: 27 May 2019, 04:36 am by Steve »

timind

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3847
  • permanent vacation
Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #68 on: 27 May 2019, 12:01 pm »
As far as vinyl vs. digital, let's acknowledge that for some of us, there are collecting/ historical aspects to the love of vinyl. When I go into a large record store and start browsing, I feel a connection with the history of recorded music. The smell, feel, typography, and photography of a vinyl lp can enhance a deeper connection with the recording than pulling up a playlist on a  screen. The act of engaging with vinyl recordings and all the rituals it entails can reinforce the likelihood that you'll listen more closely to the music. Those aspects of vinyl appreciation are totally subjective of course, but art appreciation IS a subjective experience. I think that's a large part of the reason younger people are buying vinyl even if they don't appreciate good sound reproduction.

Rather like some prefer a drive in a wooden chassis three wheel Morgan to a quasi-autonomous high tech Tesla I suppose.  :lol:

As one who grew up listening to records, (I'm 64 and started collecting records at 14) I have none of the feelings toward vinyl you describe. Although I do occasionally put a record on the turntable for a listen, I don't feel any closer to the music when doing so. Nor do I feel any differently about an album found in a record store vs an album purchased through Discogs.
Some of the most moving musical experiences I've had during my life happened while listening to a crappy car radio. It's the music, not the medium as far as I'm concerned.

As for your auto analogy, I suppose the Morgan would be more fun ONCE. For my daily driver though, I'd take the Tesla.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #69 on: 27 May 2019, 12:21 pm »
As one who grew up listening to records, (I'm 64 and started collecting records at 14) I have none of the feelings toward vinyl you describe. Although I do occasionally put a record on the turntable for a listen, I don't feel any closer to the music when doing so. Nor do I feel any differently about an album found in a record store vs an album purchased through Discogs.
Some of the most moving musical experiences I've had during my life happened while listening to a crappy car radio. It's the music, not the medium as far as I'm concerned.

As for your auto analogy, I suppose the Morgan would be more fun ONCE. For my daily driver though, I'd take the Tesla.



Well stated. 


For me, the migration to digital was fueled by migration to Classical music.  The noise floor and lack of dynamics from large complex symphonic performances was a deal breaker for me with vinyl.   


I totally get why some folks prefer the sound of vinyl, as it does have unique sound characteristics.  Occasionally, I'll connect up a tube preamp/amp setup and enjoy the sounds that tubes provide.  For me, it's more about the hobby aspect and the DIY interaction than measurements/specs, though one strives to get measurements as best as possible.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #70 on: 27 May 2019, 12:26 pm »
I will back you in the above position Steve N. In addition for public consumption, using a particular analog design but exchanging different quality parts, and using the specs we generally used in manuals, the specs will remain the same, but the sonics will be quite different.

Cheers
steve






I've experienced this first hand with DIY tube preamps and amps.  For example, changing out resistors to non-inductive types can make a difference sonically.  Coupling caps can make a big difference with the sonic presentation. The quality of audio output transformers can make a difference as well. 




Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #71 on: 27 May 2019, 10:23 pm »

Power cords is another highly debated area in audio.  Some folks believe that after market power cords will improve the system.  Other folks obviously do not subscribe to this. 


Rather than re-hash the issue here, the topic was discussed at length in this thread:


https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=163708.0

Steve

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #72 on: 28 May 2019, 01:16 am »

I've experienced this first hand with DIY tube preamps and amps.  For example, changing out resistors to non-inductive types can make a difference sonically.  Coupling caps can make a big difference with the sonic presentation. The quality of audio output transformers can make a difference as well.

One can also alter the sonics by simply altering the power supply itself, leaving the other parts intact. The specs will measure the same. The problem of power cords, rectifier tubes, power transformer making a sonic difference can all be eliminated by a properly designed filtering system. The preamp is easy, the class AB amplifier is much more difficult.

However, many like to manipulate the sonics via the power transformer, rectifier, power cord etc for the subjective qualities. No point, just an observation.
Another observation over the decades of research is that it is virtually impossible to design an accurate "sounding" component by just specs. It is extremely difficult even with specialized, proprietary listening tests.

-----

For general consumption; let's take a typical frequency response spec, say +/- 0,1db from 20-20khz. That means the frequency response deviation, the amplitude deviation from 20hz to 20khz is only in the -54db range; basically not good. As one can see, that typical spec. given for components is not much help.

cheers
steve

Russell Dawkins

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #73 on: 28 May 2019, 01:36 am »
I've had a look through the archives of Hi-Fi News & Record Review, the British magazine, and can't find it, but I do remember them doing a test about 25 years ago in response to the apparently paradoxical disparity between the perceived performance of two really good sounding amplifiers and their measured performance which was really poor. The amps were an Ongaku and a Jadis.

The result of this fairly comprehensive teast was that perceived sound quality had surprisingly little to do with most measurable forms of distortion, like harmonic and intermodulation. In fact the only measurable parameters that seemed to correlate with sonic quality seemed to be
1. speed of settling time after a clipping event, and
2. benign reaction to RF contamination of the input signal.

I think Martin Colloms was one of the testers and the other was a similarly respected man.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #74 on: 28 May 2019, 11:58 am »
I've had a look through the archives of Hi-Fi News & Record Review, the British magazine, and can't find it, but I do remember them doing a test about 25 years ago in response to the apparently paradoxical disparity between the perceived performance of two really good sounding amplifiers and their measured performance which was really poor. The amps were an Ongaku and a Jadis.

The result of this fairly comprehensive teast was that perceived sound quality had surprisingly little to do with most measurable forms of distortion, like harmonic and intermodulation. In fact the only measurable parameters that seemed to correlate with sonic quality seemed to be
1. speed of settling time after a clipping event, and
2. benign reaction to RF contamination of the input signal.

I think Martin Colloms was one of the testers and the other was a similarly respected man.



Given that these are two expensive (and maybe low power) tube amps, it's not surprising that they wouldn't measure all that well.  Single Ended Triode tube amps tend to exhibit this behavior.  It really depends on one's perception of  constitutes good sound.  SET triode amps can be very seductive sounding.  Having said that, SET amps are not for everyone.



One tube amp from days gone by that actually measured well for the time was the Harmon Kardon Citation II. 


I can't think of a single solid state amp that sounds great but measures poorly.


SET Man

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #75 on: 9 Jun 2019, 01:44 am »
If all you care about is specs and measurements, you will be missing out on a lot of great audio quality IME.

Steve N.

Hey!

     +1 on this. I remembered when I was younger starting to get into audio I would be impressed when I see something with excellent specs and measurements. I was more about more power, lower THD must be more accurate and that would mean better sound.

     Well, now I have SET amps (18wpc and 40wpc), 6" Single Driver speakers, tubed pre, CD with simple NOS DAC, and turntable. I'm sure my system measure like crap on the scope but to my ears they sound right. I do enjoy my system now as much I would when I hear live music at the Carnegie Hall, Met Opera at the Lincoln Center or even when I hear live music play around NYC.... well, almost as much to be honest since live music is still better. Funny that I once have a 250wpc SS amp and a pair of speaker with massive driver area, the Maggie 1.5.

    Anyway, I still believe in spec and measurement, we need this to make sure that the design is stable and won't blow up! Other than for me now is #%&* the measurement and THD. If the sound is right to my ears and it won't blow up I'm good! Now as I'm getting older I value emotionally correct more than technically correct.

Buddy


Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #76 on: 9 Jun 2019, 03:10 pm »
There are a lot of options and choices when putting together a good sounding audio system.  I get why single ended triode (SET) amps have appeal.  They tend to focus on the mid-range (presence) region, which much of the musical information resides.  One of the big reasons so many audiophiles still love tubes is because tubes just seem to reproduce this range with more natural sounding timbres over solid state.  (In general, there are always exceptions).


The limitation with SET is one cannot get the frequency extremes reproduced accurately.  A single 6" driver is simply not going to provide the lower bass registers or the upper frequencies with any real authority.  For some audiophiles, that is not important to them.  For others, it's a deal breaker.  SET's also tend to be low power, so the speakers need to be real efficient to get live music levels. 


For me, in order to get close to a live symphony, large floor standing speakers and lots of wattage is the way to go.  The tube amps I have on hand are higher wattage units in pentode, which is needed to drive the speakers. 


The best overall sound I've achieved with the speakers has been with Devialet integrated units.  They are one of the very few SS setups that have a pristine sounding presence region, a dead quiet background, and support the frequency extremes without compromise.   

audioengr

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #77 on: 9 Jun 2019, 04:03 pm »
There are a lot of options and choices when putting together a good sounding audio system.  I get why single ended triode (SET) amps have appeal.  They tend to focus on the mid-range (presence) region, which much of the musical information resides.  One of the big reasons so many audiophiles still love tubes is because tubes just seem to reproduce this range with more natural sounding timbres over solid state.  (In general, there are always exceptions).


The limitation with SET is one cannot get the frequency extremes reproduced accurately.  A single 6" driver is simply not going to provide the lower bass registers or the upper frequencies with any real authority.  For some audiophiles, that is not important to them.  For others, it's a deal breaker.  SET's also tend to be low power, so the speakers need to be real efficient to get live music levels. 


For me, in order to get close to a live symphony, large floor standing speakers and lots of wattage is the way to go.  The tube amps I have on hand are higher wattage units in pentode, which is needed to drive the speakers. 


The best overall sound I've achieved with the speakers has been with Devialet integrated units.  They are one of the very few SS setups that have a pristine sounding presence region, a dead quiet background, and support the frequency extremes without compromise.   

I don't have any problem getting the full frequency spectrum from my SET monoblocks.  35W each.  Better, tighter bass than a 600W SS monoblock and better highs as well.  No limitations that I can hear.

Maybe you don't have the right SETs for your speakers.

Steve N.

Freo-1

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #78 on: 9 Jun 2019, 04:16 pm »
I don't have any problem getting the full frequency spectrum from my SET monoblocks.  35W each.  Better, tighter bass than a 600W SS monoblock and better highs as well.  No limitations that I can hear.

Maybe you don't have the right SETs for your speakers.

Steve N.



There is a misunderstanding.  The statement was in reference to the previous post with a single 6" driver.   If one has speakers specifically designed for a full frequency that are very efficient, then of course the full frequency spectrum can be achieved with a low powered SET amp.  Those are very rare and very expensive.


A 600W monoblock does not say much, outside of the fact it's got lots of power.  A pair of Devialet Expert Pro amps (in mono) will in all probability sound better than the vast majority of systems put together, regardless of price.  And, it Won't run out of power when playing back a Mahler Symphony at realistic concert hall levels.  (Not sure 35 watts will be able to achieve that).
« Last Edit: 9 Jun 2019, 07:29 pm by Freo-1 »

BobRex

Re: Audio Myths Thread
« Reply #79 on: 10 Jun 2019, 01:30 am »

A 600W monoblock does not say much, outside of the fact it's got lots of power.  A pair of Devialet Expert Pro amps (in mono) will in all probability sound better than the vast majority of systems put together, regardless of price.  And, it Won't run out of power when playing back a Mahler Symphony at realistic concert hall levels.  (Not sure 35 watts will be able to achieve that).

And here goes another myth.... The idea that you can fit the acoustic output of a 60 person plus orchestra into a typical residential room at full tilt is inane.  Most room can't even support a single piano at full bore!  Then there's the idea that you can fully replicate the acoustic wave of said orchestra coming out of a couple of relatively tiny apertures.  Such a wave is so distorted that it's actually a miracle that it's recognizable. 

And yes, with a 100 dB sensitivity speaker, 35 watts would work just fine in most rooms.